Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [RFC] extended txid docs

From: "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Chris Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [RFC] extended txid docs
Date: 2007-10-18 14:25:51
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
On 10/17/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Thanks.  Here is a version with your changes applied, plus
> > minor code cleanup and example output.
> I can't really see the reasoning for putting this into the PG
> documentation.  It's tremendously complicated and doesn't seem like
> something very many people would want to read about.  In any case
> it seems rather out of place where it is --- we don't have large
> code examples elsewhere in func.sgml.
> It almost looks like something that should be turned into a pgfoundry
> or contrib module.

The whole point of the functions it to allow doing snapshot-based
queries.  It is indeed tricky, but that increases the need for
documentaton, no?

I think the last "more realistic code" section can be dropped,
it shows more user-friendly function but adds nothing new,
and the code is rather unreadeable.


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2007-10-18 14:26:27
Subject: Strange error dropping foreign key
Previous:From: qljsystemsDate: 2007-10-18 14:23:03
Subject: I've discovered an error with the tcl pgmail function

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2007-10-18 14:39:20
Subject: Re: Why copy_relation_data only use wal whenWALarchivingis enabled
Previous:From: Florian G. PflugDate: 2007-10-18 14:19:31
Subject: Re: Why copy_relation_data only use wal whenWALarchivingis enabled

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group